Hoffman v. Northern States Power Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1ConcurrenceDietzen, Justice
I agree with the majority’s conclusion that appellants’ claim for compensatory damages is barred under the filed rate doctrine, but I disagree that appellants’ claim for injunctive relief is not barred under the filed rate doctrine. Because I conclude that the relevant provisions of the tariff are ambiguous, I would decline to answer the certified question as to whether the filed rate doctrine bars the claim for injunctive relief. I would simply refer appellants’ claim for injunctive relief to the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (MPUC) to resolve the ambiguity in the tariff.
Like the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- International Audiotext Network, Inc. v. American Telephone and Telegraph CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1995
- Eternity Global Master Fund Limited v. Morgan Guaranty Trust Company of New York and Jpmorgan Chase BankCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2004
- Brookfield Trade Center, Inc. v. County of RamseySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
- Lorix v. Crompton Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
- Zobel & Dahl Construction v. CrottySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.